House of Lords: Peers' Motor Mileage and Bicycle Allowances

Lord Berkeley: asked the Chairman of Committees:
	What are the current rates for use of a motor vehicle and bicycle for Peers' travel between their homes and the House of Lords and on business of the House.

Lord Brabazon of Tara: With effect from 1 April 2003, the rate of motor mileage allowance is 56.1 pence for the first 20,000 miles for the period to 31 March 2004. Further mileage in this period is payable at the rate of 25.9 pence per mile.
	Also with effect from 1 April 2003, the rate of the bicycle allowance is 7.2 pence per mile.
	Following resolutions of the House on 20 July 1994 and 20 May 1998, the rate of motor mileage allowance and bicycle allowance is uprated annually on 1 April in line with the increase in the retail prices index over the previous 12 months to March.

House of Lords: Peers' Motor Mileage and Bicycle Allowances

Lord Berkeley: asked the Chairman of Committees:
	What was the total amount of allowances claimed for use of car and bicycle by Peers during the last financial year; and how many Peers claimed for these two allowances.

Lord Brabazon of Tara: The information requested is not available in exactly the form requested. However, the total amount of travelling expenses reimbursed to Members for the last financial year was £1,875,168. The following table shows the methods of transport used and the total amounts reimbursed:
	
		£ 
		
			 Method of transport Amount Reimbursed (2002–03) 
			 Bicycle 68 
			 Car 581,359 
			 Rail 158,541 
			 Air 38,387 
			 Car and Rail 522,007 
			 Car and Air 107,835 
			 Car, Rail and Air 404,164 
			 Rail and Air 62,807 
			  
			 Total 1,875,168 
		
	
	The total mileage claimed for travel by car in 2002–03 was 1,480,601 miles.
	The total mileage claimed for travel by bicycle in 2002–03 was 990 miles and the amount reimbursed was £68.35. Two Members made claims for travel by bicycle in this period.
	During 2002–03, a total of 392 Members made mileage claims.

House of Lords: London Congestion Charge and Peers

Lord Berkeley: asked the Chairman of Committees:
	Whether Peers are able to reclaim payment of the London congestion charge as part of their travel expenses.

Lord Brabazon of Tara: The House Committee decided on 10 December 2002 that no additional reimbursement would be available to assist Members in meeting the costs of congestion charging. Members are not, therefore, able to claim the London congestion charge as part of their travel expenses. Members may, however, claim the cost of the charge under the day subsistence and incidental travel heading.

House of Lords: Life Peerages

Lord Patten: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether it is possible for life Peers to renounce their titles and places in the House of Lords under current practice and legislation, and, if so, by what means.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: It is not currently possible for life Peers whose peerages were created under the terms of the Life Peerages Act 1958 to renounce their titles or their places in the House of Lords, although they may take leave of absence from the House at any time during a Parliament by applying in writing to the Clerk of Parliaments. The Government are currently consulting over whether legislative provision should be made to allow for voluntary resignation from the Lords and disclaimer of life peerages.

School Attendance Targets

Baroness Sharp of Guildford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When they intend to commence Section 53 (Attendance Targets) of the Education Act 2002.

Baroness Ashton of Upholland: We intend to commence Section 53 (Attendance Targets) of the Education Act 2002 in time for the 2004–05 school year. The provision will enable regulations to be made which can require schools to set targets for authorised as well as unauthorised absences from school. This is in line with the Government's approach to reduce unauthorised absences in the 2003–04 school year and improve overall attendance levels thereafter.

Disabled Children and Child Abuse:NSPCC Report

Lord Morris of Manchester: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What consideration they have given to the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children's report entitled "It doesn't happen to disabled children"—child protection and disabled children; and what action they will take on its recommendations.[HL81]Rebo

Baroness Ashton of Upholland: We welcome the publication of the NSPCC report, "It doesn't happen to disabled children"—child protection and disabled children. We will consider the recommendations contained in the report carefully.
	We recognise the particular vulnerability of disabled children to abuse, which increases when, as a result of their disability, children are unable to communicate abuse. That is why government guidance on safeguarding children, including Working Together to Safeguard Children (1999) and Framework for the Assessment of Children in Need Practice Guidance (2000), highlights the need to promote a high level of awareness of this increased vulnerability and sets out measures that should be taken to strengthen the capacity of disabled children and their families to communicate abuse.
	The forthcoming National Service Framework for Children, Young People and Maternity Services will be addressing the issue of safeguarding all children, including disabled children.

Sixth Forms: Ofsted Inspections

Baroness Sharp of Guildford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many reports they have received under Schedule 7, paragraph 6, to the Learning and Skills Act 2000 of inspection findings of inadequate sixth forms in the years ending (i) March 2002; and (ii) March 2003.

Baroness Ashton of Upholland: Nine secondary schools inspected by Ofsted in the year ending March 2002 were judged to have inadequate sixth forms. Six schools were judged to have inadequate sixth forms in the year ending March 2003.

Sixth Forms: Ofsted Inspections

Baroness Sharp of Guildford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What information do they collect about schools with inadequate sixth forms in connection with reports of inspection findings under Schedule 7 to the Learning and Skills Act 2000.

Baroness Ashton of Upholland: My department receives copies of inspection reports for secondary schools judged to have inadequate sixth forms by Ofsted and copies of reports of monitoring visits made by Her Majesty's Inspectors. Copies of school action plans and local education authority commentaries on these and their own statements of action are also copied to the department.

Sixth Forms: Ofsted Inspections

Baroness Sharp of Guildford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many schools have had a second inspection of the adequacy of their sixth forms; and of those inspections how many resulted in a second finding that the sixth form was inadequate.

Baroness Ashton of Upholland: Three schools have received follow up inspections since 2001 which concluded that their sixth forms were no longer inadequate.
	In two schools, which had inadequate sixth forms with serious weaknesses in the main school, follow up inspections have resulted in both schools being placed in special measures.

Sixth Forms: Ofsted Inspections

Baroness Sharp of Guildford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many sixth forms have been closed following the procedures set down in Schedule 7 to the Learning and Skills Act 2000.

Baroness Ashton of Upholland: No schools have closed following the procedures set down in Schedule 7 to the Learning and Skills Act 2000.

Post Mortems: Inter-Departmental Group

Lord Williams of Elvel: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What progress has been made in relation to the inter-departmental group established by the Attorney-General.

Lord Goldsmith: Following the appeal of Sally Clark and the acquittal of Trupti Patel, I established a group comprising the police, Crown Prosecution Service, Home Office and other relevant agencies to consider whether any cases in which Dr Williams has given important evidence require a more in depth review.
	On the 28 July, the inter-departmental group held its first meeting. Progress was made in two areas. How previous cases in which Dr Alan Williams conducted a post mortem were to be identified and what factors would be used to select the cases on which the group should concentrate.
	Following that meeting, work commenced immediately on the identification of cases. Several agencies assisted in respect of this process, with the police and the Crown Prosecution Service taking the lead. The group set a deadline of mid-September for the conclusion of that process. By that date, approximately 50 previous cases had been identified, which dated back between five and seven years. These cases all involved charges of murder, manslaughter or infanticide where Dr Williams had been instructed by the police to conduct the post mortem and which had resulted in a conviction.
	The cases themselves are now being reviewed. An experienced member each of the Metropolitan Police and of the Crown Prosecution Service are conducting the review.
	This work is continuing. It is anticipated that the results of the initial review will be considered early next year.
	The group is also considering whether the exercise of reviewing cases should be extended to those involving Professor Meadow. I would also refer to the steps taken by the Crown Prosecution Service referred to in my Written Answer to Baroness Gould of Potternewton on 25 June 2003 (WA 22).

Ipswich Railway Tunnel Upgrading

Lord Marlesford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will give a completion date and estimated cost of upgrading the railway tunnel at Ipswich so that it allows free movement by rail of containers to and from the port of Felixstowe.

Lord Davies of Oldham: The project is scheduled for completion in September 2004 at an estimated cost of £5 million.

NHS: Choice, Responsiveness and Equity

Lord Williams of Elvel: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When they will publish their response to the national consultation on choice, responsiveness and equity in the National Health Service.

Lord Warner: The Department of Health's document, Building on the Best—Choice, Responsiveness and Equity in the NHS, Cm 6079, has been published today. Copies have been placed in the Library.

Mileage Allowances and Taxation

Lord Berkeley: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What are the maximum approved mileage rates for use of car and bicycle authorised by the Treasury; and whether use of higher rates attracts additional personal tax liabilities.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: The maximum approved mileage allowance payment (AMAP) which can be paid to employees without incurring tax and National Insurance is set by law at 40 pence per mile for the first 10,000 business miles and 25 pence for each additional mile for all cars. The rate for other forms of transport is 24 pence per mile for motorcycles and 20 pence per mile for cycles.
	If employers pay less than the AMAP rate, employees will be able to claim tax relief on the difference between the rate paid by their employer and the statutory rate. If employers pay more than the AMAP rate, the excess will be chargeable to tax and National Insurance contributions.

Mortgages

Baroness Noakes: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they support the proposal to set up a European Mortgage Finance Agency to encourage long-term fixed rate mortgages; and whether they consider that such an agency should be backed by implicit or explicit guarantee by the European Union.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: The Chancellor has asked David Miles, Professor of Finance at Imperial College, to undertake a review of the UK mortgage market. This will involve an examination of whether there has been any market failure that has held back the market for longer-term, fixed-rate mortgages and a consideration of associated opportunities, risks and potential costs.
	Professor Miles will deliver an interim report by the time of the Pre-Budget Report and a comprehensive report and recommendations to the Chancellor by Budget 2004.

Gas Price Regulation

Lord Taylor of Warwick: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether, in order to ensure more effective regulation of gas prices, they will consider extending the remit of the Financial Services Authority to include regulatory enforcement for Spectron as well as for the International Petroleum Exchange.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: Both Spectron and the International Petroleum Exchange (IPE) are subject to regulation by the Financial Services Authority (FSA). Spectron has a number of subsidiaries active in the trading of commodity derivatives, including gas products, which are regulated as authorised firms by the FSA. The IPE is regulated by the FSA as a recognised investment exchange.
	As a recognised investment exchange, the IPE operates a prescribed market under the market abuse regime which is enforced by the FSA. Behaviour in relation to contracts traded on the exchange has to comply with the prohibitions in the market abuse regime. Spectron does not operate a prescribed market under the market abuse regime. But some of the contracts, including gas contracts, on Spectron's electronic trading system can be relevant products under the market abuse regime and behaviour in relation to them has to comply with the regime's prohibitions.
	The Government have no plans to change the remit of the Financial Services Authority to increase further its responsibilities in relation to Spectron.

National Statistician

Lord Elton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord McIntosh of Haringey on 14 November (WA 214) concerning the National Statistician, whether they will arrange for the publication in the Official Report of the letter referred to therein.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: The information requested falls within the responsibility of the National Statistician, who has been asked to reply.
	Letter to Lord Elton from Colin Mowl, Director of Macroeconomics and Labour Market, ONS, on behalf of the National Statistician, dated 9 December 2003.
	The National Statistician has been asked to reply to your recent question further to the Written Answer by the Lord McIntosh of Haringey on 14 November (WA 233). I am replying in his absence. (HL49)
	We intend to write to Lord Oakeshott before the House rises for the Christmas Recess. A copy of the letter will be placed in the Libraries of the Houses and also sent to you.

Licensing Act 2003

Lord Lucas: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What estimates they have received from local authorities, and have made themselves, of the likely costs involved in meeting the obligations under the Licensing Act 2003 and the revenues anticipated from licence fees under that Act.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: The Government's estimate of the costs of the licensing regime to be introduced in England and Wales by the Licensing Act 2003 was set out in the regulatory impact assessment published with the Licensing Bill in November 2002 and placed in the Library of the House. Representatives of local authorities have not produced any full or overall cost estimate of the regime for England and Wales, but have indicated where they believe the Government's estimate would fail to fully recover their costs. We are therefore currently considering whether our estimate requires revision in the light of the information and material provided by representatives of the local authorities. When our consideration is complete, we expect to publish a full schedule of the fees to be prescribed by the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport under the provisions of the 2003 Act.

Sport: Drugs Policy

Lord Moynihan: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When they intend to establish an anti-doping agency, independent of UK Sport, with a reporting structure direct to the Minister of Sport.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: I refer the noble Lord to my Written Answer of 23 October 2003 (Official Report, WA196). UK Sport under the leadership of its new chair, Sue Campbell, is undergoing a review of its functions which includes the role and responsibility for anti-doping arrangements in the UK.

Sport: Drugs Policy

Lord Moynihan: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the United Kingdom's current anti-doping arrangements are compliant with the World Anti-Doping Agency Code with regard to (a) mandatory aspects of the code; and (b) best practice suggested by the code.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: UK Sport, the UK's national anti-doping agency, is currently revising the national anti-doping policy for sport's national governing bodies to achieve compliance with the articles of the World Anti-Doping Code for Olympic sports in time for the 2004 Games in Athens, and for non-Olympic sports by April 2005.

Sport: Drugs Policy

Lord Moynihan: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	On which dates discussions have been held with the Football Association to (a) review its anti-doping procedure; and (b) consider individual doping offences; and whether they will provide summary progress reports from each meeting.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: The matter of reviewing football's anti-doping programme is for the Football Association and the UK's national anti-doping agency, UK Sport.
	The UK Government do not comment on individual cases where athletes have committed a doping offence. Disciplinary procedures including the imposing of sanctions is a matter for sport's national governing bodies.
	My right honourable friend the Minister for Sport intends to meet the Football Association and UK Sport to discuss anti-doping early in the New Year. The Government do not intend to make available reports of meetings with the Football Association for reasons of confidentiality, in accordance with Exemption 14 of the Code of Practice on Access to Government Information. Disclosure would harm the position of the Football Association, and undermine any frank and candid discussions.

Sport: Drugs Policy

Lord Moynihan: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What was the annual budget for UK Sport's anti-doping work for the years 1996–97 to 2003–04; and what the budget will be for the years up to 2006–07.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: Funding for UK Sport's anti-doping work for the years 1996–97 to 2005–06 is shown in the following table. Figures for 2006–07 will be determined following the outcome of the 2004 spending review.
	
		
			 Year Amount  £000 
			 1996–97(1) 288 
			 1997–98 1,149 
			 1998–99 1,199 
			 1999–2000 1,468 
			 2000–01 1,380 
			 2001–02 1,507 
			 2002–03 1,917 
			 2003–04(1) 2,033 
			 2004–05 3,000 
			 2005–06 4,500 
		
	
	Notes:
	UK Sport was established by Royal Charter in July 1996 and became fully operational on 1 January 1997. The expenditure recorded is for three months only.
	Figures for 2003–04 and beyond are indicative only.

Anti-Doping Tests: Accredited Laboratoriesin UK

Lord Moynihan: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many laboratories in the United Kingdom are accredited to analyse anti-doping tests.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: The UK has one laboratory accredited by the World Anti-Doping Agency/International Olympic Committee at King's College London which analyses anti-doping samples for prohibited substances.

Voluntary Sports Clubs: VAT

Lord Moynihan: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What communication they have had with the European Commission regarding VAT being levied on voluntary sports clubs.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: The Government have had no discussions with the European Commission about VAT being levied on voluntary sports clubs. The Commission's proposals on reduced rates of VAT do not affect the VAT treatment of club membership subscriptions.

Sport: Taxation Revenue

Lord Moynihan: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will provide an estimate of the revenue to the Exchequer from the taxation of sport.

Lord McIntosh of Haringey: The figures are not available in the format requested. They would only be available at disproportionate cost, would require the yield from sporting activities to be inferred from across a range of more broadly defined leisure activities and would require assumptions about tax incidence that could render the results misleading.

Hazard Industries: HSC Classifications

Lord Berkeley: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	On what basis the Health and Safety Commission classes the railways, along with gas conveyance, explosives, offshore and nuclear installations, as major hazardous industries; and why they do not include road transport in this category.

Baroness Hollis of Heigham: The Health and Safety Commission classes major hazard industries as those industries where a failure to eliminate, control or mitigate the main hazards arising in those industries could lead to a catastrophic incident occurring. Such industries are characterised by potentially dangerous operations involving complex management control arrangements and complex technical processes. Road transport is not the same. The main hazard is human error, which road transport legislation is designed to minimise.

Older Workers

Baroness Noakes: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they agree with research conducted for Saga which showed that the proportion of people working past statutory retirement age will rise to 13 per cent by 2020.

Baroness Hollis of Heigham: There is no statutory retirement age, only a state pension age. This is the date from which a person can receive state pension, regardless of whether they have retired or remain in work.
	We are committed to extending choice and opportunities for older workers, and to introducing age discrimination legislation. In addition, we are promoting employment among those aged 50 and over and helping people over pensionable age to remain in work where they wish to do so. Our Age Positive Campaign is encouraging employers to adopt non-ageist employment practises, and studies show that there has already been a marked reduction in the number of companies using age in recruitment.
	The Department for Work and Pensions does not produce projections of future levels of employment; however, recent reseach by the department shows that a fifth (33 per cent of women and 10 per cent of men) of the workforce aged 50 and over plan to continue working beyond state pension age. The report of this research, Factors Affecting the Labour Market Participation of Older People, was published in November and a copy is available in the Library.

Health and Safety Commission and Health and Safety Executive

Lord Berkeley: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How the effectiveness and efficiency of the Health and Safety Commission is monitored and when the National Audit Office last carried out a review of the commission.[HL82]Rebo

Baroness Hollis of Heigham: The Health and Safety Commission (HSC) formally submits its proposed annual business plan to Ministers for their approval. Progress against the plan is monitored in regular meetings between the chair of the commission and Ministers. The Comptroller and Auditor-General audits the HSC's annual report and the accounts of the Health and Safety Commission and Executive before these are laid in Parliament.
	The National Audit Office has not reviewed HSC. However, it has reviewed a number of aspects of the work of the executive.

Health and Safety Commission and Health and Safety Executive

Lord Berkeley: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How the Health and Safety Commission exercises its corporate governance role over the Health and Safety Executive; and, in particular, how it assures itself that the executive is effective and efficient in its work.

Baroness Hollis of Heigham: The roles of the Health and Safety Commission (HSC) and Health and Safety Executive (HSE) are defined by the Health and Safety at Work etc Act 1974. Corporate governance issues are addressed in greater detail in the Framework of Accountabilities, the HSC and HSE response to the code of practice for board members of public bodies and the guide for non-departmental public bodies.
	These arrangements are kept under review and my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions has agreed to proposals from the chair of the commission to further strengthen the commission's role from April 2004.